President Joe Biden, in a video posted Thursday on X, touted the proposal as “an important move toward reversing longstanding inequities.”
“Look folks, no one should be in jail for merely using or possessing marijuana. Period,” he said. “Far too many lives have been upended because of a failed approach to marijuana, and I’m committed to righting those wrongs.”
Amazing first steps. This will hopefully help to reduce costs for marijuana businesses, and their prices which will hopefully negatively affect the black market.
Doesn’t really say what making it a schedule 3 drug actually means.
Yeah, we get it, taking it from 1 to 3 moves it from the group with heroin, LSD, ecstasy, methaqualone, and peyote, and puts it in the group with Tylenol with codeine, ketamine, anabolic steroids, and testosterone.
https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling
What does that mean from a LEGAL perspective?
Someone caught with anabolic steroids without a prescription is still in trouble, yeah?
https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/steroids-possession-lawyers.html
The Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990 defines steroids as a Schedule III drug. It assesses federal penalties for both the illegal possession and sale of steroids. The following are the federal punishments for both possession and sale of steroids:
Simple possession of steroids with no prior offenses:
Up to a year in federal prison; or
Minimum fine of $1,000.
Simple possession of steroids with certain prior convictions:
Minimum 15 days in prison, and up to two years in prison; or
Minimum fine of $2,000.
Possession with intent to sell
Up to five years in prison; or
Minimum fine of $5,000.
If I Use or Sell Steroids, What State Penalties Will I Face?
Each state has the right to legislate laws that regulate drugs they view as harmful. Most states echo the Federal scheduling of steroids as a Schedule III drug. Therefore, state punishments usually mirror the punishments for drugs of this category:
Simple possession can be characterized as either a misdemeanor or felony. One may face jail time of up to 2 years if in a state where steroid possession is considered a felony. A fine will usually be levied in states that list steroids as a misdemeanor.
The sale of steroids is a felony in every state. In some states, the punishment for selling steroids can be up to 7 years in prison.
So it looks like this whole notion of just re-scheduling it to “de-criminalize it” is a misnomer.
whole notion of just re-scheduling it to “de-criminalize it” is a misnomer.
Has anyone suggested rescheduling it would be akin to decriminalizing? I mean, maybe if it was moved to schedule v.
I think generally people have been reacting to this by pointing out it should just be descheduled.
Biden has been blurring the line using decriminalization in conjunction with these plans:
But simply changing the schedule is not the same thing.
Ty for the links
“Look folks, no one should be in jail for merely using or possessing marijuana. Period,”
Pretty sure you’re going to wind up in jail for possession of it as a Schedule III drug as well though, unless you have a prescription.
Possession of a controlled substance classified in Schedule III of the Drug Control Act, upon conviction, exposes the violator to a misdemeanor conviction for which the punishment is confinement in jail for up to twelve months and a fine up to $2,500, either or both.
I feel like I am missing a piece of the puzzle.
How does this legalize weed? This feel like the same thing as last time with less jail time.
It legalizes medical and research use of weed, which are currently federally illegal. Doesn’t do much for recreational use though.
This doesn’t legalize weed, but arguably it’s a step in the right direction.
My napkin guess is that this is some sort of specific process/tactic, either it only allows
12 levels of reclassification at a time or that was all that could be agreed on (with multiple agencies, likely the DEA limiting the pace). So either avoiding the Senate or the tiniest of steps that pretty much anybody will allow/defend. Slow-and-steady could be the plan, assuming Biden wins again and actually follows up.Well that and it probably really helps with the turning-a-blind-eye, like the difference between ignoring/acquitting a hit-and-run fender-bender versus ignoring/acquitting the act of treating a no-traffic intersection (in clear conditions) like a 4-way stop. Maybe it will be enough to reduce hostility and move the relevant overton window over time while avoiding pushback.
EDIT: Looking at it more, this seems to be the department of HHS pressuring the DEA on clear medical use. As others say, the lower restriction might help further medical study which could in-turn result in further reclassification.
The President can’t decriminalize (legalize) a drug. That requires congressional legislation.
Feels a bit like they’re trying to put the horse back in the barn. If it’s only by prescription at the federal level, they may use that as legitimacy to crack down on recreational use and make it harder to get it for medical use.
As much as I am a skeptic of everything this administration pretends to try to do, but making it legal for medical purposes is what started the legalization process in every legalized state. Biden doesn’t make malicious moves, he just does half measures on everything that usually result in nothing but a show.
It’s crazy that you actually think that’s what this is about.
Brb, going to the dispensary.
You’ll still go to jail, but the president says he personally feels like you don’t deserve to.
Or live in a free state.
Which means it will still probably be illegal to sit around a campfire and smoke a joint while you are camping.
President Joe Biden, in a video posted Thursday on X, touted the proposal as “an important move toward reversing longstanding inequities.”
That’s a bingo.
What the hell is “X”?
How the hell am I supposed to solve for X when I haven’t been given the rest of the equation?
X + Videos / Joe Biden
Joe Biden is paying on x videos? Is this the new whitehouse.com?
It’s slang for ecstasy, a recreational drug which Biden needed to be on to give him the confidence needed to share the video.
This is the example of mental gymnastics people should reference.
“Slang” kids! He’s old!
It’s the 24th letter of the Latin alphabet, but I’m not sure what that has to do with video
Twitter’s rebrand.
Something irrelevant to modern discussions.
Including this one
It’s pronounced “shitter.”
But it’s spelled “xitter.”
It’s the Chinese pronunciation of X, though it should probably be the Arabic pronunciation of X given Elon’s ties to Saudi Arabia.
No idea what that looks/sounds like.
X gonna give it to ya
It’s NOT. A. Fuckin’ GAME!
I’m legit pissed that a bunch of these journalists have stopped using “Formally known as Twitter”.
Because seriously, fuck Musk. I will never stop dead naming that platform.
Still waiting on Congress to decriminalize and expunge records.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617
We need a better congress, that’s for damn sure.
Well, all 114 co-sponsors are Democrats, so maybe just a less Republican Congress?
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617/cosponsors
If there aren’t enough republicans to say no, then the democrats will just do it themselves.
I’d consider your point if the Democrats only voted for the bill. Co-sponsoring is adding their name in support of the bill’s introduction to Congress in order to weigh on its importance.
I’m sure all 114 would vote in favor of it. I would expect most democrats would vote in favor of it. But the democrats have a pattern where if there needs to be N people to pass something, they’ll only be able to gather N-1 people to support it. That -1 will get attacked in the press and they’ll make a big fuss out of it, but importantly they’ll cause the bill to fail so that the democrats can continue to campaign on that point. See: healthcare, minimum wage
This. The issue isn’t “congress” it’s half the body repeating the most regressive ideals among them.
Oh, don’t worry, I’m with you. I’m from Oregon, and I can tell you that the people who represent my interests in the House and Senate are specifically not the problem here. (We do have some bad ones in the east, but not in my district.)
